Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I was just thinking about RB25s and GTRSs getting to around 250 odd RWKWs with supporting mods , and wondering if E85 would push a bit further to say 270 at the treads .

I suppose the limiting factor with a GTRS would be its 0.64 AR GT28 turbine housing , I'm wondering if E85 gives lower combustion temps and EGTs and if so can a bit more exhaust flow for a given turbine housing size .

Anyone using E85 and a GTRS in their Skyline ?

Cheers A .

I was running a simple stage 1 sierra bushed highflow, 250wkw at best limited by knock to around 18psi. With the e70 I could run much more boost and timing gaining 50wkw at 20psi. The compressor didnt have much more in it though. I assume the GTRS would be similar, possibly able to run more boost than my highflow.

I used to think it was best to max out a smaller turbo but I realized the pressure in the manifold was just too great and not allowing the cylinder to empty of exhaust properly. I guess this is where the extra torque comes from when going to a larger rear housing or turbo?

Have thought about that, but it still feels mechanically mean - smallest I'd try that with would be a GT2835. Having said that, have been really interested to see how a stock turbo would go on the generally accepted "safe" boost level on E85 :ninja:

Im now running the stock M35 turbo, similar to an 0p6 34 wheel on Eflex atm on a temp tune. From 180kw on petrol to 225 on ethanol but it noses over as soon as I hit stall, 4000 rpm. Very responsive, too much so. I would hate to know the pressure in the exhaust manifold, it must be over 60psi.

I though exactlty the same disco that cooler EGTs would somehow solve the isssue of haivng too much exhaust gas there in the first place..I was going to run my little turbo on e85, but as Scott said, trying to push that much gas through the rear end, although somewhat effective, is also self defeating and probably harmful to your system in general.

In my case I thinks it would be better to simply swap out the turbo and be able to make the same power on PULP, you may gain a little lag but the power would be more effective and better for your engine as a whole. Plus PULP is everywhere :)

I would peg 280ish from a gtrs on e85

No one even dreamed 300+ was possible from a 2835 a couple of years back... So much so that when I did 320 some people called BS

Dan chin's old highflow hit 290rwkw on ethanol

You are looking at about 15% above what a given turbo is known to e capable of at th usual boost levels

I would peg 280ish from a gtrs on e85

No one even dreamed 300+ was possible from a 2835 a couple of years back... So much so that when I did 320 some people called BS

Dan chin's old highflow hit 290rwkw on ethanol

You are looking at about 15% above what a given turbo is known to e capable of at th usual boost levels

15% would be the gain with no extra boost. All depends what the tuner is comfortable with at the end of the day.

The stock turbo only made 1kw extra going from 17 to 18 psi but made another 100nm so even if the power drops off torque can still be improved. Not bad for a tiny ceramic wheel imo.

Man I would LOVE to give mine a hit on E85 and I definetely will as soon as we get it here. Would be interesting to see how far it can be pushed.

Would also make things a lot safer for me with the nitrous. Will hopefully have my car back on the dyno soon to see how what she is making these days with the gas.

So do we know the pressures in the manifold are dangerous using a 250rwkw turbo on 98 to make 270-280 on E85? I am running a very responsive hypergear turbo that makes ~250rwkw as well. My plan was to keep the responsiveness and add some more mid and top range by adding E85. Surely if I was to keep boost around 18psi it would be ok.

Whats the difference with SimonR32 running 25psi with a much larger turbo with an ethanol blend fuel?? Surely he would have quite high manifold pressures as well??

Is it the EGT's or the manifold pressure that we are mainly concerned with?

Having said that, have been really interested to see how a stock turbo would go on the generally accepted "safe" boost level on E85 :ninja:

Anyone you know that might be interested? I know someone that has some 555's "lying around" :)

So do we know the pressures in the manifold are dangerous using a 250rwkw turbo on 98 to make 270-280 on E85? I am running a very responsive hypergear turbo that makes ~250rwkw as well. My plan was to keep the responsiveness and add some more mid and top range by adding E85. Surely if I was to keep boost around 18psi it would be ok.

Whats the difference with SimonR32 running 25psi with a much larger turbo with an ethanol blend fuel?? Surely he would have quite high manifold pressures as well??

Is it the EGT's or the manifold pressure that we are mainly concerned with?

EGTs and manifold pressure are basically related, responsive turbos usually have small rear housings to help spin your turbine wheel faster..

Problem is it will only flow so much.. More power = more exhaust gas..Try pumping too much exhaust gas through a small housing and it gets red hot.

It also backs up and gets forced back into your combustion chamber which is the last place you want spent exhaust gas when you are trying to pump fresh air in there..

EGTs and manifold pressure are basically related, responsive turbos usually have small rear housings to help spin your turbine wheel faster..

Problem is it will only flow so much.. More power = more exhaust gas..Try pumping too much exhaust gas through a small housing and it gets red hot.

It also backs up and gets forced back into your combustion chamber which is the last place you want spent exhaust gas when you are trying to pump fresh air in there..

Yes and then how does this change with E85 or other higher octane fuels? Is it not making more power out of the same amount of air? Or is it just enabling your engine to work the turbo harder without experiencing detonation?

My head is not working too well this afternoon!

EGTs and manifold pressure are basically related, responsive turbos usually have small rear housings to help spin your turbine wheel faster..

Problem is it will only flow so much.. More power = more exhaust gas..Try pumping too much exhaust gas through a small housing and it gets red hot.

It also backs up and gets forced back into your combustion chamber which is the last place you want spent exhaust gas when you are trying to pump fresh air in there..

Exactly, the gasses actually make their way back into the intake on valve overlap I have been told, thats why they carbon up. Not the best way to make powah, still it works. The ethanol just gives me a false sense of security. :)

Yes and then how does this change with E85 or other higher octane fuels? Is it not making more power out of the same amount of air? Or is it just enabling your engine to work the turbo harder without experiencing detonation?

My head is not working too well this afternoon!

My opinion, ethanol makes more power due to the lazy way it burns, right through the piston stroke, which in turn makes more torque. That's why you can pump so much timing in without going backwards or detonating. As the exhaust is cooler and less dense (less carbon?) it actually causes more lag than a petrol tune I have noticed.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Look, realistically, those are some fairly chunky connectors and wires so it is a reasonably fair bet that that loom was involved in the redirection of the fuel pump and/or ECU/ignition power for the immobiliser. It's also fair to be that the new immobiliser is essentially the same thing as the old one, and so it probably needs the same stuff done to make it do what it has to do. Given that you are talking about a car that no-one else here is familiar with (I mean your exact car) and an alarm that I've never heard of before and so probably not many others are familiar with, and that some wire monkey has been messing with it out of our sight, it seems reasonable that the wire monkey should be fixing this.
    • Wheel alignment immediately. Not "when I get around to it". And further to what Duncan said - you cannot just put camber arms on and shorten them. You will introduce bump steer far in excess of what the car had with stock arms. You need adjustable tension arms and they need to be shortened also. The simplest approach is to shorten them the same % as the stock ones. This will not be correct or optimal, but it will be better than any other guess. The correct way to set the lengths of both arms is to use a properly built/set up bump steer gauge and trial and error the adjustments until you hit the camber you need and want and have minimum bump steer in the range of motion that the wheel is expected to travel. And what Duncan said about toe is also very true. And you cannot change the camber arm without also affecting toe. So when you have adjustable arms on the back of a Skyline, the car either needs to go to a talented wheel aligner (not your local tyre shop dropout), or you need to be able to do this stuff yourself at home. Guess which approach I have taken? I have built my own gear for camber, toe and bump steer measurement and I do all this on the flattest bit of concrete I have, with some shims under the tyres on one side to level the car.
    • Thought I would get some advice from others on this situation.    Relevant info: R33 GTS25t Link G4x ECU Walbro 255LPH w/ OEM FP Relay (No relay mod) Scenario: I accidentally messed up my old AVS S5 (rev.1) at the start of the year and the cars been immobilised. Also the siren BBU has completely failed; so I decided to upgrade it.  I got a newer AVS S5 (rev.2?) installed on Friday. The guy removed the old one and its immobilisers. Tried to start it; the car cranks but doesnt start.  The new one was installed and all the alarm functions seem to be working as they should; still wouldn't start Went to bed; got up on Friday morning and decided to have a look into the no start problem. Found the car completely dead.  Charged the battery; plugged it back in and found the brake lights were stuck on.  Unplugging the brake pedal switch the lights turn off. Plug it back in and theyre stuck on again. I tested the switch (continuity test and resistance); all looks good (0-1kohm).  On talking to AVS; found its because of the rubber stopper on the brake pedal; sure enough the middle of it is missing so have ordered a new one. One of those wear items; which was confusing what was going on However when I try unplugging the STOP Light fuses (under the dash and under the hood) the brake light still stays on. Should those fuses not cut the brake light circuit?  I then checked the ECU; FP Speed Error.  Testing the pump again; I can hear the relay clicking every time I switch it to ON. I unplugged the pump and put the multimeter across the plug. No continuity; im seeing 0.6V (ECU signal?) and when it switches the relay I think its like 20mA or 200mA). Not seeing 12.4V / 7-9A. As far as I know; the Fuel Pump was wired through one of the immobiliser relays on the old alarm.  He pulled some thick gauged harness out with the old alarm wiring; which looks to me like it was to bridge connections into the immobilisers? Before it got immobilised it was running just fine.  Im at a loss to why the FP is getting no voltage; I thought maybe the FP was faulty (even though I havent even done 50km on the new pump) but no voltage at the harness plug.  Questions: Could it be he didnt reconnect the fuel pump when testing it after the old alarm removal (before installing the new alarm)?  Is this a case of bridging to the brake lights instead of the fuel pump circuit? It's a bit beyond me as I dont do a lot with electrical; so have tried my best to diagnose what I think seems to make sense.  Seeking advice if theres for sure an issue with the alarm install to get him back here; or if I do infact, need an auto electrician to diagnose it. 
    • Then, shorten them by 1cm, drop the car back down and have a visual look (or even better, use a spirit level across the wheel to see if you have less camber than before. You still want something like 1.5 for road use. Alternatively, if you have adjustable rear ride height (I assume you do if you have extreme camber wear), raise the suspension back to standard height until you can get it all aligned properly. Finally, keep in mind that wear on the inside of the tyre can be for incorrect toe, not just camber
    • I know I have to get a wheel alignment but until then I just need to bring the rear tyres in a bit they're wearing to the belt on the inside and brand new on the outside edge. I did shorten the arms a bit but got it wrong now after a few klms the Slip and VDC lights come on. I'd just like to get it to a point where I can drive for another week or two before getting an alignment. I've had to pay a lot of other stuff recently so doing it myself is my only option 
×
×
  • Create New...